2.0's out ranking money site!?

19 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I created 2 web 2.0's and put multiple pages and built them almost as if they were my money site (not as good obviously)

They're both outranking my main site. I built them on Wordpress and Blogger.

I realize the page rank of those sites obviously have some authority compared to my new site up. But I was under the impression they weren't worth squat unless they had links pointing at them to juice them up.

Can anyone give me some insite as to why they're both outranking my money site when both of them are point to that site?

Also the links from those site to my money site are not showing up in Ahrefs. Is that normal? I thought they were Dofollow sites for links?
#money #ranking #site
  • Profile picture of the author PerformanceMan
    Did you build links to them? If not, it indicates the on-page SEO is better on those properties.
    Signature
    Free Special Report on Mindset - Level Up with Positive Thinking
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8174013].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author burton4550
      Originally Posted by PerformanceMan View Post

      Did you build links to them? If not, it indicates the on-page SEO is better on those properties.

      They do have a couple links built to them (14 on one and 1 on the other) which were done with SeNuke.

      I just thought if you link the 2.0's to your money site that should up the rankings for the money site not the 2.0's.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8174024].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author PerformanceMan
        Originally Posted by burton4550 View Post

        They do have a couple links built to them (14 on one and 1 on the other) which were done with SeNuke.

        I just thought if you link the 2.0's to your money site that should up the rankings for the money site not the 2.0's.
        It does. But it also depend on when Google picks up the links. The power of the Web 2.0 makes a difference too.

        A high PR link to the money site would likely solve this.
        Signature
        Free Special Report on Mindset - Level Up with Positive Thinking
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8174037].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author burton4550
          Originally Posted by PerformanceMan View Post

          It does. But it also depend on when Google picks up the links. The power of the Web 2.0 makes a difference too.

          A high PR link to the money site would likely solve this.
          Is that also why they wouldn't be showing up in Ahrefs, cause the links just haven't been picked up yet?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8174049].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
            Originally Posted by burton4550 View Post

            Is that also why they wouldn't be showing up in Ahrefs, cause the links just haven't been picked up yet?
            Ahrefs crawl is completely separate from Google's crawler. Just because one finds it doesn't mean the other has or will. It's not as if they share data with each other.
            Signature
            Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
            http://www.godoveryou.com/
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8174095].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author burton4550
              Originally Posted by godoveryou View Post

              Ahrefs crawl is completely separate from Google's crawler. Just because one finds it doesn't mean the other has or will. It's not as if they share data with each other.

              Oh ok gotcha.

              Thank you
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8174185].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Hansons
    And web 2.0 sites are not bad, they would rank higher than your own site, as they are authority sites (blogspot, wordpress etc.)......
    Signature

    Is your website Hacked? Try -> www.sitebeak.com
    Is Google Analytics installed Properly? Test -> www.GAtective.com
    Impersonal Google search? Check -> www.impersonal.me

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8175190].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Voasi
    If you're not familiar with what "Domain Authority" is, go to SEOmoz and check it out.

    The web 2.0's have Domain Authority with 100's of 1000's of links pointing throughout all the pages. Google loves those types of sites. Google also gives higher rankings to pages on those types of sites because it has a high domain authority within their algorithm.

    Just pointing a few links at those web 2.0 pages will boost those pages high, as they're already piggy-backing off the domain authority of the entire URL.

    Your website does not have fantastic domain authority quite yet. If you continue to build more links that have high domain AND page authority, you'll easily rank over your Web 2.0's... you're just not there yet.
    Signature
    Want $6,000/mo. SEO Clients? Watch My Free Video!
    We do WSO Designs TOO!!! Best on WF! - Click Here
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8176857].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lyanna
    It's cool, don't worry if the web 2.0s outrank your website. That sort of thing happens a lot but if your money site is any good it should eventually outrank the web 2.0s.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177011].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
    This is going to sound odd, but it sounds like you built those web 2.0 sites for the links back to your site. While a lot of people would consider that questionable SEO these days - why don't you instead build these web 2.0's specifically to drive traffic to your main site?

    It's not an uncommon practice to use these types of properties to increase the size of your overall traffic funnel and you might find that you are happy they rank so well instead of being distressed by it.

    Just a thought.
    Signature
    Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
    http://www.godoveryou.com/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177019].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author burton4550
      Originally Posted by godoveryou View Post

      This is going to sound odd, but it sounds like you built those web 2.0 sites for the links back to your site. While a lot of people would consider that questionable SEO these days - why don't you instead build these web 2.0's specifically to drive traffic to your main site?

      It's not an uncommon practice to use these types of properties to increase the size of your overall traffic funnel and you might find that you are happy they rank so well instead of being distressed by it.

      Just a thought.
      Hello there Godoveryou

      I'm just an amatuer so don't yell at me :p I'm not sure what you mean exactly?

      I set the web 2.0's up semi following Mathew Woodwards method (except without the software).

      I tried to set them up almost as if they were my actual money sites, but then put a link back to my money site, and then used software to try and juice them up a bit, which didn't work so well since I only got a total of 15 links pointed at the 2.0's from a gig I ordered.

      Seems I went at it all wrong. I thought that making these and putting different variations of the anchor text back to my money site and then juicing them up a bit would help my money site move up a few spots and also obtain some traffic to the 2.0's.

      I'm doing this all wrong huh? :confused:
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177103].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
    No, Matt is a good guy and I'm not going to speak poorly about his methods or anyone that tries to use them.

    You don't have to pick and choose

    What I mean is why not create just a few higher quality web 2.0's that help provide answers and information to the reader instead of trying to sell right off them.

    You can still use Matthew's methods, but you can try what I'm talking about as well so that if and when traffic does make it to your money site, it's partially prepared to convert already.

    I didn't mean to imply that you were doing it wrong. I was just trying to give you another way to go about it.

    The more tools you have in your toolbox, the better use you can make out of the traffic you get. I was just trying to give you another tool - not take one away by any means.
    Signature
    Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
    http://www.godoveryou.com/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177150].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author burton4550
      Originally Posted by godoveryou View Post

      No, Matt is a good guy and I'm not going to speak poorly about his methods or anyone that tries to use them.

      You don't have to pick and choose

      What I mean is why not create just a few higher quality web 2.0's that help provide answers and information to the reader instead of trying to sell right off them.

      You can still use Matthew's methods, but you can try what I'm talking about as well so that if and when traffic does make it to your money site, it's partially prepared to convert already.

      I didn't mean to imply that you were doing it wrong. I was just trying to give you another way to go about it.

      The more tools you have in your toolbox, the better use you can make out of the traffic you get. I was just trying to give you another tool - not take one away by any means.
      Oh ok I see what you mean. Another option to help and reach people offering helpful content and answering questions, not just using them for a backlink to rank the money site.

      That is a good idea! Especially considering these are ranking higher right now and actually getting traffic.

      I like it, and I think I'll just go ahead and do it too.

      I actually have a tier link being worked on right now for the money site any ways, so might as well put these 2.0's to good use.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177165].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nik0
    Banned
    Originally Posted by burton4550 View Post

    I created 2 web 2.0's and put multiple pages and built them almost as if they were my money site (not as good obviously)

    They're both outranking my main site. I built them on Wordpress and Blogger.

    I realize the page rank of those sites obviously have some authority compared to my new site up. But I was under the impression they weren't worth squat unless they had links pointing at them to juice them up.

    Can anyone give me some insite as to why they're both outranking my money site when both of them are point to that site?

    Also the links from those site to my money site are not showing up in Ahrefs. Is that normal? I thought they were Dofollow sites for links?
    Most links from web2.0 platforms do not show up in back link checkers as they are not so easy to find for those back link checkers.

    Your domain has already at least 2 links pointed at it, and probably a link from your domain registrar in the shape of a list of recent purchased domains, as well as from whois sites.

    Those web2.0's don't have a single reference on the web, hence they are not easy to find. You know the thing with web2.0's is often that you end up on a sub domain and the root or any other page doesn't link to your web2.0 from anywhere, so it's almost like a site on it's own. I'm always surprised that they still can get authority easy that way. The opposite is true, your web2.0 is linking to the root domain and other pages from the platform through Help/Home/Support etc. links, so each link that you build to a web2.0 helps the root domain but the opposite is not true.

    The proof is that I have web2.0s that are years old and when I check them in OSE or any other tool they show up as PA 0 / DA 0 / Citation Flow 0 / Trust Flow 0 / Ahrefs rank 0.

    Press releases and article directories are better from that point of view as those do get featured at the homepage of the site and thus they are in the link juice flow line. (despite that it's only a tiny amount of time), same applies for most bookmark sites.

    So in short, web2.0's where you only upload an article and do nothing else are in fact the most worthless links that exist online, even worse then blog comments or forum profile links. Sounds strange but it's true.

    Now I obvious do not suggest to start building profile links, spam article directories and blogs for comments as those are seen extremely spammy by Google. Just saying that a web2.0 that is nothing done with, no user interaction on the platform and what not is just a PR n/a link and will always stay that way. Unless you obvious take action by back linking them or leaving comments on other people's blogs where your name probably links back to your blog, and hence you pull the juice from their page. A method that was pretty popular some time ago on black hat forums, and still is working fine on some platforms.

    An example of that is Tumblr, however they made all of those comment and reblog links nofollow as it got abused way too heavily. Squidoo is another good example that went nofollow lately, cause of the mass abuse that took place by blackhatters.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177191].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author burton4550
      Thanks for that reply nikO for inoformative for sure.

      I have a question about the Tiered link building structure though.
      I was given the impression that when you do Tiered link building that the first Tier is usually 2.0 sites followed by some wikis, blog comments ect.. at the Tier 1 to give those juice and then the 3rd Tier to the Tier 2 was pretty much just spam and crap backlinks.

      Is that how that works?

      My delemna is, I know that the most important aspect is to build high quality content that offers value to your visitors. That part I have down, for the most part anyways.

      What I'm lost at is the whole backlinking methods. I've been spending almost everyday in this forum for the last month or 2, and have learned "A LOT". I understand that the best backlinks are the natural backlinks and social side from your visitors. Next I'm guessing would come the high PR backlinks from relevant sites such as your own private link network from buying expired or auctioned off PR domains and that kind of stuff.

      But what about if you don't have the money to spend to build your own link network and need to get a site up in the rankings quickly (like for a hot seller that may not be that hot in a couple of months)?

      That's where I'm lost, and thought that the tiered link building structure would solve this, but I'm not exactly sure how to do this.

      I'm considering getting GSA, but it would be pretty pointless if I don't even know the correct way to use.

      Any help would be much appreciate

      Brad
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177413].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author godoveryou
        Originally Posted by burton4550 View Post

        Thanks for that reply nikO for inoformative for sure.

        I have a question about the Tiered link building structure though.
        I was given the impression that when you do Tiered link building that the first Tier is usually 2.0 sites followed by some wikis, blog comments ect.. at the Tier 1 to give those juice and then the 3rd Tier to the Tier 2 was pretty much just spam and crap backlinks.

        Is that how that works?

        My delemna is, I know that the most important aspect is to build high quality content that offers value to your visitors. That part I have down, for the most part anyways.

        What I'm lost at is the whole backlinking methods. I've been spending almost everyday in this forum for the last month or 2, and have learned "A LOT". I understand that the best backlinks are the natural backlinks and social side from your visitors. Next I'm guessing would come the high PR backlinks from relevant sites such as your own private link network from buying expired or auctioned off PR domains and that kind of stuff.

        But what about if you don't have the money to spend to build your own link network and need to get a site up in the rankings quickly (like for a hot seller that may not be that hot in a couple of months)?

        That's where I'm lost, and thought that the tiered link building structure would solve this, but I'm not exactly sure how to do this.

        I'm considering getting GSA, but it would be pretty pointless if I don't even know the correct way to use.

        Any help would be much appreciate

        Brad
        Here are a couple threads which were the source of information that several current tiered linking tutorials are based on.

        They should give you a little more insight on tiered link building.

        http://seosunite.com/f2/tiered-link-...-tutorial-815/
        http://seosunite.com/f2/tiered-backl...lding-seo-829/

        I'm a bigger fan of what known as 'Content-To-Content' tiered linking vs the 'Content Pumper' tiered linking that you are describing. Both can work though.
        Signature
        Don't Know Me? - Read my interview at Matthewwoodward.co.uk
        http://www.godoveryou.com/
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177477].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author burton4550
          Here are a couple threads which were the source of information that several current tiered linking tutorials are based on.
          Thank you for these.

          I'll check them both out right now and hopefully get it all correct.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8177504].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        Originally Posted by burton4550 View Post

        Thanks for that reply nikO for inoformative for sure.

        I have a question about the Tiered link building structure though.
        I was given the impression that when you do Tiered link building that the first Tier is usually 2.0 sites followed by some wikis, blog comments ect.. at the Tier 1 to give those juice and then the 3rd Tier to the Tier 2 was pretty much just spam and crap backlinks.

        Is that how that works?

        My delemna is, I know that the most important aspect is to build high quality content that offers value to your visitors. That part I have down, for the most part anyways.

        What I'm lost at is the whole backlinking methods. I've been spending almost everyday in this forum for the last month or 2, and have learned "A LOT". I understand that the best backlinks are the natural backlinks and social side from your visitors. Next I'm guessing would come the high PR backlinks from relevant sites such as your own private link network from buying expired or auctioned off PR domains and that kind of stuff.

        But what about if you don't have the money to spend to build your own link network and need to get a site up in the rankings quickly (like for a hot seller that may not be that hot in a couple of months)?

        That's where I'm lost, and thought that the tiered link building structure would solve this, but I'm not exactly sure how to do this.

        I'm considering getting GSA, but it would be pretty pointless if I don't even know the correct way to use.

        Any help would be much appreciate

        Brad
        I'm no expert in tiered link building as always when I do tiered link building I use my tier 2 network of long timed dropped domains, but obvious that was an investment, although a relatively small one (around $1000,-) as I could pick up the long time forr just the registration fee. However these are lot less strong then recently dropped domains or expired ones.

        What I see with my link building practices is that the more juice a link has the more effective it is.

        Therefor it makes not much sense to build tier2 links like forum profiles and web2.0's as those have as good as zero juice. The same counts for wiki links really.

        So I guess it all comes down to how deep you go.

        Let's say you only have 2 tiers, tier 1 exists of web2.0s or other contextual links that have zero juice. Then it might be wise to use guest books and blog commenting to drive juice to these first tiers.

        In case of 3 tiers you can build in some wiki links and other type of contextual links like article directories and free press release sites, and boost these with the blog comments/guest book links again.

        Why blog comments and guest book links in the latest tier? Simply cause these do end up on pages with pagerank while all the other links always end up on PR n/a pages or extremely temporarily juice.

        At the same time blog comments and guest book links are about the most spammy links that you can get so although they do pass on juice you should never point these links directtly at your money site as you will tank at some point so best to put to put them as far from your money site as possible, hence the 3 tier technique.

        Besides all the above, if you have no money to invest you can better find a job to save some money and start from there. Money makes money, simple as that.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8178558].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seoace
    Based on experience, keep link building to your money site & tiered linking to your 2.0s and your money site will 100% outrank your web 2.0s.

    Tried. Tested. Seen. Experienced.
    Signature
    Who else needs a SEO Client Dashboard for their SEO services ?
    Let your clients monitor their SEO campaigns (Rankings, Backlinks and Work Done)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8179515].message }}

Trending Topics